Poll #19

FLTK matrix user chat room
(using Element browser app)   FLTK gitter user chat room   GitHub FLTK Project   FLTK News RSS Feed  
  FLTK Apps      FLTK Library      Forums      Links     Login 
 Home  |  Articles & FAQs  |  Bugs & Features  |  Documentation  |  Download  |  Screenshots  ]

Show All Polls | Show Comments | Submit Comment ]

Poll #19

Which version of FLTK are you currently using?
pre 1.1.6 (please state why) 272 / 13%
1.1.6 or svn, no interest in 2.0 127 / 6%
1.1.6 or svn, waiting for 2.0 to mature 839 / 41%
1.2, no interest in 2.0 23 / 1%
1.2, waiting for 2.0 to mature 152 / 7%
2.0, mostly for testing 226 / 11%
2.0, already using it in a product 370 / 18%
2009 total votes.
This poll is closed.

User Comments

Submit Comment ]

From geyrfugl, 07:03 Jan 04, 2006 (score=3)

Badly designed poll !

First it asks to "state reason" for using fltk<1.1.6 without providing any means to do so.

Second, it won't let me select more than one option - and I do need to as I use differenrt versions of fltk on different systems.

Third, it only lets one user vote from behind a firewall (everyone appears to have the same IP address, even though there is a whole network of machines), so once I have registered a vote for which version I use for one machine here, neither I nor anyone else can vote again for what version is used on another machine or project.

All the above will rather bias the results.

I use 1.0.4, 1.1.4, 1.1.6 and am about to use 1.1.7 release candidate. I use 1.0.4 and 1.1.4 because the application I build on those machines works fine with those versions (1). I use 1.1.6 on this machine because the distro (Mandriva LE 2005 for AMD64) came with the 1.1.6 RPM already. And I'm going to use 1.1.7 rc on my Aurora 2.0 beta 2 system, because Fedora core 3, on which Aurora is based, doesn't have an fltk RPM, so I must build from source.

(1) In fact, 1.0.4 works better than the 1.1.x versions. For some reason, when I moved to the 1.1.x fltk, the window my application runs in no longer has a "maximise" button. Whether this is caused by a change in fltk or in some underlying susbsystem isn't clear enough to fill out a fault report.
Reply ]

From bdiscoe, 14:29 Dec 13, 2005 (score=3)

I'm using 1.1 because that's what's in the Debian Ubuntu 5.10 Repository right now, so it's only a few mouse click with the Package Manager to install FLTK.  I didn't know there were newer releases until i came to this site today.  I wonder what it takes to get a newer version into the Repository.
Reply ]

From Anonymous, 22:24 Oct 17, 2005 (score=3)

I started using fltk2 on a new project, but I switched back to 1.1.6 after fluid corrupted my .fl file.  All of the Widget sizes and positions had apparently been replaced with random numbers.  It's a good thing I had this problem sooner rather than later so it wasn't too much trouble to switch over.  2.0 looks nice, but I think I'll wait. 
Reply ]

From sanel.z, 00:57 Apr 20, 2005 (score=3)

I am currently using 1.1.x (actually 1.1.6 version).

1.2 looks great and have the same API (no compatibility issues) as 1.1.x, but is much slower and unfinished :(.

I have followed 2.0 development last two years, but this series need much working and testing. I my opinion, if we get 2.0 release now, there should be at least year or two to bring it as same as 1.1.x in stability.

So for production, 1.1.x is the only solution. For now.
Reply ]

From svartalf, 10:30 Apr 18, 2005 (score=3)

Eagerly awaiting 2.0- I have to use 1.1.6 for all my stuff as 2.0's still officially "in flux" and therefore is something that we can't use for production tools, etc.  Keep pluggin' guys, it's all looking good.
Reply ]

From ajs856.tiscali, 10:08 Apr 06, 2005 (score=3)

I'm still using a pre 1.1.5rc3 version with some patches (e.g. delete_widget) because we experienced some crashes on user systems (WinNT and Win2000), which can't be reproduced on a development system. The patched version runs stable, but I did not yet try 1.1.6 (svn). I'm planning to go to 2.0 once it is stable.

Reply ]

From alvin, 05:23 Apr 05, 2005 (score=3)

When I started using fltk 2 years ago, I used 2.0. I found 2.0 to be great. The fltk namespace, objects, etc were really intuitive. I was using it for small custom apps.

Now that I am making apps that will be used by others in my department, I use 1.1.6. The main reason is that 2.0 was (or could) change so that I would have to port my code. So, by switching to 1.1.6 I am confident that any patch will not break the ABI or API.

I am eagerly waiting for a stable 2.0. I have to say, starting as a fltk virgin, I found 2.0 very easy to learn. However, learning to use 1.1.6 (after 2.0) was more challenging.

Keep up the great work!

Reply ]

From greg.ercolano, 01:28 Apr 05, 2005 (score=3)

I'm still using a hot-wired version of 1.1.4 with selected patches from 1.1.5 and 1.1.6 to keep the UTF8 code alive, on which my Japanese customers are dependent.

fltk-utf8 is currently frozen at 1.1.4: http://www.oksid.ch/fltk-utf/

I'd move to 1.2.x if I knew it had all the 1.1.6 stuff.. I haven't been working with 1.2.x, but maybe I should if it has utf8 and tracks the 1.1.x stream fixes.
Reply ]

From NULL, 12:34 Apr 12, 2005 (score=3)

Greg do you plain to use FLTK 2.0 ? Since in your post you only mention 1.x series
Reply ]

From greg.ercolano, 13:11 May 27, 2005 (score=3)

PS. Answer is no, I don't use 2.0 -- won't until stable release is out, and even then, I'll probably wait several revs before I port apps to it. Might do some new small tools in 2.0 just to get use to it. For instance, moving the nixieclock app over to 2.0 should be a win, due to some features in 2.0 it could benefit from.
Reply ]

From greg.ercolano, 13:09 May 27, 2005 (score=3)

I voted for 1.1.6.. which is where I'm at presently in terms of patching my hot rodded 1.1.4/utf8.

For platforms that don't support utf8, I'm using 1.1.6.

Reply ]

From duncan.gibson, 05:41 Apr 04, 2005 (score=3)

I am currently experimenting with 1.1.6 and clearly 2.0 is the way to go in the long term. However, I only have a couple of hours per week, if at all, in which to explore, so I just don't have the time to learn and re-learn any bleeding edge technology as it evolves and changes.

I look forward to 2.0 being stable though...
Reply ]


Comments are owned by the poster. All other content is copyright 1998-2023 by Bill Spitzak and others. This project is hosted by The FLTK Team. Please report site problems to 'erco@seriss.com'.